Corporate Advocacy Program: The best way to manage and repair your business reputation. Hiding negative complaints is only a Band-Aid. Consumers want to see how businesses take care of business. All businesses will get complaints. How those businesses take care of those complaints is what separates good businesses from bad businesses.

This is to report a very serious corporate fraud by this credit card processing company that has been engaging in mail and wire fraud for a number of years. The company:
? has processed the same small charge backs up to three times;
? is holding and refusing to pay over $8000 of receipts to pay charge-backs;
? has taken over $100 from my bank account based on less than $400 in charge-backs;
? refuses to refund even the money that has already been taken from the account for charge-backs.

A colleague signed me up for this over ten (10) years ago and I had no prior issues with this concern since I used it only sporadically in my patent and criminal law practice. Last November, a client my firm agreed to compensate me with stock the business, of which I was Director and Secretary, and was used my virtual terminal, processed through Group ISO was used for two weeks. The pattern of charges changed from an occasional charge of hundreds to thousands of dollars on occasion to twenty or so charges, few over $100, every day.

Over the Thanksgiving Holiday, without any notice whatsoever, the deposits stopped and, because of the Holiday, it took me a week to realize there was a problem. The firm notified me, not through the email account that it had communicated with me through for a decade, but with a hard copy to the company whose address was on my initial application.

The charges were made in person, but no swiping machine was used; and customers were told that they would get a charge from one of my corporations instead of the store. Apparently this was not made clear in several instances, resulting in about six charge-backs totaling $393.97 out of over $10,000 in charges. Yet, the account was frozen, then closed, and Group ISO now claims to be holding $8,294.84 of funds for products that our customers had received.

Initially, the firm was quite amicable about the problem and told me they would likely be refunding the money in early January (See attached email) and eagerly sought to open a new account for my new endeavor. But after this debacle, the companys President and my client wanted no part of Group ISO. Following our refusal to sign up with this firm that was holding over $8,000 of our money, the company then told me that it could hold the funds for up to ten (10) months. This was based on a Policy Manual that they have failed to produce a copy signed by me. All that I have signed is a one page price information sheet (attached).

On Monday, I noticed the same charge-back appear for the "first time" and to my horror found that indeed it was the exact name, last four digits, and date as one of the first charge-backs that appeared, had re-appeared in January and now. I sent the company a strong letter and instructed them to take no more funds from my account. Today it again took money, from my bank account for charge-backs that they have already taken in the past.

The multiple debits are criminal wire fraud and a civil suit may be a waste of time - but may be the only route absent action by state or federal government officials. I have reported this to several federal and state authorities, with a PDF of the Ripoff Reports, and if an investigation is not commenced promptly will have no choice but to file a civil complaint in Orange County.

Corporate Advocacy Program: The best way to manage and repair your business reputation. Hiding negative complaints is only a Band-Aid. Consumers want to see how businesses take care of business. All businesses will get complaints. How those businesses take care of those complaints is what separates good businesses from bad businesses.

AUTHOR: Nancy Lord Ltd - (United States of America)

SUBMITTED: Saturday, January 12, 2013

POSTED: Saturday, January 12, 2013

I sincerely apologize to CTS Services for my post of February 2012. The hold on my account was necessary to cover any charge backs from customers who noted that their purchases were made at an entity other than the one on the charge.

To its credit, once the 10 month period was over and the handful of charge backs were all paid, CTS paid back every penny that had been in the account. This was done without a complaint being filed, a regulator involved, or even a formal attorneys letter, and it was done quickly. The turnaround time between the initial agreement and the wiring of funds into my account was less than a week.

Ms. Allison Taylor prioritized this transaction after many months of difficult transactions, accusations, and threats by this office. In fact, my initial post was inaccurate in several aspects that once Ms. Taylor explained to me were readily understood.

In the ten years that CTS had been my credit card processor, there were no other problems with a single transaction. This situation became fraught with difficulties because the I had violated the terms of my agreement with the company.

It is hard to imagine that a situation so fraught with difficulties would culminate in the return of all funds into my account without a single penny in additional fees for all the time and trouble that the Ms. Taylor expended in explaining the position I had placed the company in and getting the transaction approved once the charge-back period was over.

You really do not know who you are doing business with these days until you run into some adversity. This relationship went beyond adversity for many months but Ms. Allison Taylor got past that and amicably resolved the matter once the appropriate time had arrived.

I learned through this that CTS is the only place to go for credit card processing and that Ms. Allison Taylor is the reason that CTS is what it is.

AUTHOR: Financial crimes investigator - (U.S.A.)

SUBMITTED: Wednesday, May 16, 2012

POSTED: Wednesday, May 16, 2012

The merchant agreement for Nancy Lord ESQ had been approved in 2006 with an average of about $2,000 monthly volume. In November 2011 Nancy Lord processed an unusual amount of transactions and volume through the merchant account; 293 transactions for an amount of $14,000. This is an unusual trend for the merchant and therefore the account was placed under risk review by Wells Fargo. Documentation on the transactions were requested and Nancy Lord refused to supply any invoicing proving she had provided a service to her customers. Nancy Lord is an attorney and the merchant agreement was to process transactions for her legal firm only. The 293 card holders never did business with Nancy Lord, they did however purchase pet supplies at a pet store and then saw transactions on their credit card with Nancy Lords name on them. Not only were the cardholders confused who later had to file for a chargeback with their credit card company as they had never even heard of Nancy Lord but the bank found this unusual activity to be fraudulent. The transactions were not pertaining to the services that the merchant account was set up for and therefore funds were secured as it is a breach of the merchant contract to use the merchant account for any other services described by the merchant contract.

Chargebacks have posted against the merchant account due to the cardholders inability to identify the business charging them for an unidentifiable amount. The funds are held at Wells Fargo and Group ISO has absolutely no ability to take, use, or keep any of the funds from Ms. Lords fraudulent activity. The merchant may have the merchant account re-evaluated for a release of reserve funds when there has been no further activity of chargebacks posting against the merchant account by the card holders who rightfully deserve their money back. The release of reserve is based on merchant history and activity since the time of the breach of merchant contract.

AUTHOR: Nancy Lord Ltd - (United States of America)

SUBMITTED: Thursday, March 01, 2012

POSTED: Thursday, March 01, 2012

Ms Taylor emailed me a spreadsheet that showed that while there were no duplicate charges but a coincidental charge for the same amount by two customers and a "pre charge-back" notice in addition to the charge-back. The latest charge was one that I had never received notice on or any chance to respond.

The sheet conceded, however, that over $1000 has been taken from my account by CTS (allegedly a different company) based on only 7 charge-backs, all from customers who had purchased merchandise at my client's business, totaling less than $700, and various associated fees.

Ms Taylor bizarrely used this fact to justify the "holding" of the $8000 even though the charge-backs were remarkably small in number and all re-paid from my account. I must wonder if Group ISO hopes to collect the $8000 plus that it owes me in CTS charges from my own bank account.

Corporate Advocacy Program: The best way to manage and repair your business reputation. Hiding negative complaints is only a Band-Aid. Consumers want to see how businesses take care of business. All businesses will get complaints. How those businesses take care of those complaints is what separates good businesses from bad businesses.